Switzerland Rejects the Neutrality Initiative: the Communist Campaign Against NATO Continues

International Department of the Communist Party (Switzerland)

On 27 September, the Swiss people voted on a popular initiative (propositional referendum) aimed at enshrining the country’s permanent neutrality in the Federal Constitution. The initiative was rejected, receiving 29.85% of the vote nationally, against 70.15%. Although the initiative originated primarily from the nationalist right wing, around businessman and former Federal Councillor Christoph Blocher, part of the Swiss left actively supported it, considering the vote an important opportunity to oppose Switzerland’s progressive alignment with NATO and Western military policy.

The collection of signatures was launched in 2022, as a response to Switzerland’s adoption of EU sanctions against Russia. Under the Swiss system of direct democracy, promoters of a popular initiative have 18 months to collect at least 100,000 valid signatures in order to submit a constitutional amendment to a nationwide vote.

Most signatures were collected by the original promoters, including members and former members of the Swiss People’s Party (SVP), the country’s main right-wing conservative nationalist party, together with organisations from the same political area such as “Pro Schweiz”, a civil association politically close to the SVP.

However, support was not limited to the political right. A separate campaign emerged from left-wing, communist, internationalist and pacifist organisations, which defended neutrality from a fundamentally different political perspective.

What would have changed in the Swiss Constitution?

The initiative would have introduced a new Article 54a into the Federal Constitution. It would have established that Switzerland is permanently and armedly neutral and cannot join any military alliance. Cooperation with such alliances would have remained possible in the event of a direct military attack against Switzerland or preparatory acts for such an attack.

The new constitutional article would also have prohibited Switzerland from adopting non-military coercive measures against belligerent states. Switzerland’s obligations towards the United Nations would have remained explicitly reserved, as would measures intended to prevent the circumvention of non-military coercive measures adopted by other states.

Finally, the constitutional provision would have required Switzerland to use its permanent neutrality to prevent and resolve conflicts and to offer its services as a mediator.

From a communist perspective, some aspects of the text were not without contradictions. The concept of “armed neutrality”, in particular, was open to criticism. Nevertheless, the initiative offered a unique opportunity to constitutionally establish that Switzerland could not join a military alliance, creating an explicit obstacle to Swiss membership of NATO, which we do not consider a remote possibility.

The provision concerning non-military coercive measures was also particularly significant. In recent years, economic sanctions have increasingly become, from our perspective, an aggressive instrument of imperialism used to bend non-aligned governments to the will of Western powers, making their adoption incompatible with a coherent policy of neutrality. The proposed amendment would have maintained Switzerland’s participation in United Nations sanctions while preventing its autonomous adoption of unilateral measures such as those imposed by the EU against Russia.

A left-wing front for neutrality

For these reasons, several organisations developed a left-wing campaign in favour of the initiative, independently of its original promoters.

One of the organisations involved in the broader mobilisation was the United Front for Labour and Neutrality (NO EU - NO NATO), an organisation politically close to the Communist Party (Switzerland), which has long campaigned in defence of Swiss neutrality and against integration into the European Union and NATO.

The campaign was coordinated through the Internationalist and Pacifist Committee for Neutrality, which brought together the Communist Party (Switzerland), the Swiss Labour Party, the Switzerland–Cuba Friendship Association, the Swiss Peace Movement and the Independent Students Union SISA (a member of the WFTU), among other organisations.

The committee also included academics from the social-democratic political area, including Professor Wolf Linder and Professor Pascal Lottaz. Their participation was particularly significant because they are associated with the Swiss Social Democratic Party, while the party itself strongly opposed the initiative. Opponents within the social-democratic camp campaigned against it by arguing that it was favourable to Russian interests, therefore “pro-Putin”, and that its origins in the political right made it unacceptable.

The existence of this committee therefore challenged the idea that support for constitutional neutrality could simply be reduced to the point of view of the nationalist right. The organisations participating in the left-wing committee approached the question from an internationalist and pacifist perspective, connecting neutrality with opposition to military blocs, NATO and Switzerland’s progressive integration into Western military and political structures.

Mobilisation and international cooperation

The campaign included demonstrations as well as a large number of conferences and public events held across different parts of the country. While many of these were relatively local initiatives, their geographical reach and regularity gave the campaign a significant presence on the ground, with attendance that was substantial by the standards of niche political events. Together, these mobilisations formed part of a broader effort to bring the question of neutrality back into political debate from a left-wing perspective.

A significant part of this activity was coordinated in Italian-speaking Southern Switzerland, where the Communist Party has its strongest regional section.

The mobilisation also acquired an international dimension with a conference on neutrality organised in Bellinzona (Switzerland). Representatives of the Communist Party of Finland and the Communist Party of Ireland participated alongside the Communist Party (Switzerland), while contributions were also made by representatives of the Danish Communist Party, the German Communist Party and the Communist Party of Austria - Styria.

Conducted in both Italian and English, the conference was conceived not only as an intervention in the Swiss campaign but also as an opportunity to exchange experiences between communist organisations from different European countries. Particular attention was devoted to Ireland, where concerns have emerged over the future of the country’s neutrality and of the Triple Lock mechanism, and to Finland, which abandoned its longstanding military non-alignment and joined NATO in 2023 without holding a referendum on membership.

The Swiss vote therefore went beyond the political origins of the initiative. For the organisations participating in the left-wing campaign, it provided an opportunity to discuss what neutrality should mean in the present international context and whether Switzerland should continue moving towards closer military integration with NATO and the broader Euro-Atlantic security architecture.

Those who supported the initiative came from very different political backgrounds and did so for different reasons. For the communist and pacifist organisations involved, the central issue was preserving Switzerland’s independence from military alliances, limiting its participation in conflicts between other states and defending its ability to play an active role in mediation and peaceful conflict resolution.

The vote is over, but the struggle for neutrality continues

The initiative was clearly rejected at the national level, with 70.15% voting against it and 29.85% in favour. Although, the result in Canton of Ticino (Southern Switzerland) deserves particular attention. With 48.25% voting Yes, against only 29.85% nationwide, Italian-speaking Switzerland stood dramatically apart from the rest of the country. For the Communist Party, such an exceptional result also shows the extent to which its political activity on neutrality has succeeded in reaching the population. Years of consistent campaigning by the communists on this issue – a continuity that was largely absent among left-wing forces in many other cantons – helped bring the arguments for a coherent neutrality well beyond the Party’s own electorate and made it possible to convince part of the progressive electorate to support an initiative which, despite its origins on the nationalist right, could have strengthened the position of pacifist forces.

The result in the Canton of Ticino can also be interpreted, from our perspective, as a sign of distrust towards the policies pursued by Foreign Minister Ignazio Cassis. Mr. Cassis himself comes from Ticino and, as head of the Federal Department of Foreign Affairs, is the member of the Federal Council directly responsible for Switzerland’s international relations. The Communist Party has repeatedly criticised his policies, which it views as increasingly aligned with the strategic priorities of the European Union and the United States, as well as his subordinated approach to the Zionist Entity. Against this background, the fact that the Canton of Ticino came closer than any other Swiss canton to approving the initiative carries particular political significance for us, especially because the Communist Party conducted its most sustained and intensive campaign there, investing considerable organisational and financial resources in the effort.

Our concern, however, goes far beyond the domestic interpretation of the result. We fear that abroad the rejection of the initiative will be perceived not simply as a rejection of one particular constitutional definition of neutrality, but as a signal that Switzerland itself is moving away from neutrality. Whatever the intentions of those who voted No, foreign governments and populations may interpret the result as giving Switzerland greater political freedom to continue its rapprochement with NATO, adopt the sanctions policies of the European Union and progressively integrate itself into the Euro-Atlantic security architecture.

This risk of international perception is particularly serious because neutrality does not exist exclusively through Switzerland’s own definition of its foreign policy: its credibility also depends on how Switzerland is perceived by other states. The rejection of the initiative may therefore weaken the image of Switzerland as a genuinely non-aligned country and reinforce the perception that it is becoming part of the Western geopolitical bloc.

This is precisely why we are concerned that 27 September 2026 could eventually be remembered as another step in a gradual process of abandoning Swiss non-alignment. Finland demonstrates how a historically non-aligned European country can progressively move towards military integration and ultimately NATO membership. Switzerland is not Finland and the two situations cannot simply be equated, but the Finnish experience shows why apparently gradual changes in security policy should not be dismissed as politically insignificant.

The rejection of the Neutrality initiative represents, from our perspective, a victory for the forces that have promoted Switzerland’s closer integration into the Euro-Atlantic system: the European Union, which is pursuing a major rearmament policy; NATO, amid the continued escalation of its confrontation with Russia; the leadership of major Swiss banks, which had opposed the initiative’s proposed ban on unilateral sanctions, fearing that it could restrict their ability to comply with US extraterritorial legislation and thereby affect their international business; and those within the Swiss military leadership who favour closer interoperability and cooperation with NATO.

It must nevertheless be acknowledged that, throughout the campaign, those who opposed the initiative also stated publicly that they supported the principle of Swiss neutrality, but disagreed with the proposed constitutional provision, which they considered too “rigid”. We are under no illusions, but we now challenge them to show a strong sense of responsibility and put an end to the Federal Council’s policy of “double standards” pursued so far. Neutrality must no longer be applied selectively, strictly towards some countries while being interpreted more flexibly towards others.

For the Communist Party (Switzerland), this result does not put an end to the political struggle over Swiss neutrality. Our Party will continue to defend a policy of non-alignment! We will oppose the proposed revision of the Military Act, which has recently been put out for consultation and would allow Swiss soldiers to take part in military training abroad with NATO. At the same time, we will campaign against the Bilaterals III agreements with the increasingly militarised European Union, which are expected to be submitted